I like to think that a healthy mind is one that can think productively. A person who possesses a healthy mind is one who balances their desire to know more with all the other desires they have.

The trick is that you can't use knowledge and nothing else to make your life better. Good knowledge (just like a good diet) will absolutely help you, but giving into your unquenchable thirst for knowledge all the time is a disorder (like compulsive eating), not an answer.

Hrm, it's late so my counterargument may not be strong, so someone please correct me if they find flaws in it.

Bullet 1) Agreed, no debate

Bullet 2) While this is true, the same can be said in the opposite direction. It is also true that the blue sword has a 68.75% chance of doing just as well, if not better, than the red sword.

Bullet 3) I'm guessing, and not completely sure yet, that if you were to run these two swords through the same tests, red's performance will average out to blue's performance. While it is true that for each individual set of two seconds, "there will be a 31.25% chance that red will do better than blue," it is also true that there is a 31.25% chance that blue will do better than red.

One thing that would definitely sway me is the attack speed of the enemies. If enemies are melee and attack once every 1.9 seconds, then red would clearly be better. If enemies attack once every 2.1 seconds, then blue would be better.

Taking a step back, couldn't you ask atheists the same question, and wouldn't the answer be the same?

In my hypothetical question, Jesus shows up at the Superbowl and performs miracles and we all now believe that this dude exists.

He then asks the entire crowd for one brave soul to spend eternity in a lake of fire. He says "if one person volunteers, everybody else avoids hellfire, but if nobody volunteers, some people go there and others don't."

I think many people (christians and non-christians) would have the same sort of response: "That's a crazy heroic act and I wish I were awesome enough to save the entirety of the human race... but I also don't want to burn in hell for eternity."

In this hypothetical, any person who rejects this offer is not acting for the good of mankind. Any person who accepts this offer is fucking crazy, but is also reducing the total suffering of mankind.

Thanks for clarifying that. I'd heard about how important this law is with regards to the case, but didn't know the details. I guess w/ this knowledge I'd revise the sentence to "I'm saying that we better damn-well revisit this law cuz it's fuckin scary."

In any case, I think that this bolsters what I have to say about it. This case is nothing like most other cases where person A of race X kills person B of race Y precisely because of this law.

Some people are afraid of people getting away with murder that is thinly veiled as self defense. Others are afraid of white people killing black people. This case is complicated because it is an amalgam of both those fears, not just one or the other.

I'm sorry if it came off that way, but I tried to be clear that I don't think he's guilty. The facts are that he did shoot someone and he did walk free. This makes some people fearful. I can't say whether or not this is self defense because I wasn't there. I can say, however, that I understand the fear.

Nonetheless, my main point stands -- this argument doesn't hold:

"Over the xmas holidays you had 8 shootings and 6 murders of black men killing other black men, and none of these [rally-ers] decided to have one rally in their honor."

All I'm saying is that that these two issues aren't analogous. In those cases, everybody sees justice as being served. In this case, the ralley-ers don't believe justice has been served (whether or not it has).

I can understand that people think the rallying is silly. I'm interested in meaningful dismissals of the rally (and I'm glad to have heard many), but this race-swap argument simply isn't one of those.

The scary part about the Zimmerman / Martin case is that person A shot person B and walked away without much hassle. Had it not been for the (admittedly sometimes absurd) media hype, Zimmerman would have been a completely free man. This is what's scary.

Whenever people compare this incident with other violence (usually swapping out races to identify something), their argument misses the point because the cases they cite usually don't have the shooters potentially getting away with murder.

I'm not saying the dude is innocent or guilty. I'm saying that when it comes to something like this, you damn-well better go through legal due process.

That being said, yes, this stupid and fucked-up incident is a drop in the bucket compared to the shit storm that is gang-related violence in America. Nonetheless, these are still things people have a right to get furious about, both the Martin case and the gang violence.

I don't personally know anything about the finances of AA, but I have worked near the not-for-profit world, so I can make a few educated guesses.

Wikipedia says (so take it with a grain of salt) that "AA groups are self-supporting, relying on voluntary donations from members to cover expenses." This means that they probably have some place where members can donate if they choose.

With regards to the cost of things like electric and utilities, I know that in the not-for-profit world, many times you can simply ask for space. If people are sympathetic to your cause (and many people are sympathetic to the work AA does), then you can often get deeply discounted, if not free space.

If you wanted a more accurate and informed answer, I bet you could get one over at /r/alcoholism.

All questions of religion boil down to one question: does god exist or not?

Simply not true. Not all religions are theistic.

Your religion is false if your god doesn't exist. Plain and simple.

Wrong, plain and simple. Some religious people would agree with you that god does not exist. By logical extension, you are saying that their religions are false outright simply because they have no gods to begin with.

Until you prove that your god exists in the first place, there is no reason to go any deeper into your religion.

Well, yeah... you all get the idea...

Am I the only one on this subreddit who gets upset that everybody and their mother seem think religion and theism are the same thing? It feels like everybody thinks religion does one and only one thing and that the sum total of each religion hinges solely on the existence of a god.

Religions serve different purposes and do different things. read up. I'm off to bed.

Of course the practice helps everybody out (whether or not they're religious).

For many people, though, it helps a lot to find other people who are doing the same thing. It can be really helpful to get in front of someone who's got years of experience and who can help you out and answer questions. Engaging with the religion of Buddhism can accelerate people's growth in their capacity to meditate.

This isn't to say religion is the only way to get a clear mind or to achieve these particular states of awareness. It's just to say that engaging with a religion is a very practical way to help out (sorta like joining a gym and taking classes vs. working out in your garage).